Can Houston really be considered a cheap city anymore? (Sugar Land: lawyers, live)

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by GTRdad

whats in the 'city core'? why the need to be near it if you got no business over there.

Because NYC, Chicago and San Francisco have cores, and they're cool. You want us to be cool, don't you?

[Neo45]

San Francisco looks nice but definetly isn't cool

[GTRdad]

Originally Posted by eastontracks

I live around the galleria area and couldn't imagine living 17+ miles from the "core" of Houston. I lived with some relatives in nw Houston and got very bored being out there. I also don't know alief but since you ask what's in the core this is my list:

-a bike ride or jog away from memorial park. A place to take advantage of running and also trails on my bike
-good shopping also around the block in the galleria or even memorial city mall
-my location I don't have to worry about toll roads
-museums, and unique districts like rice village, river oaks, downtown, heights, montrose are all less than 15 minutes.
-easy navigation into downtown to catch an Astros or dynamo game using memorial drive instead of 59 or 10 freeway
-15 minute drive to bars in the heights, midtown or Washington (although I don't care for Washington)
-larger and diverse selection of restaurants
-close to such a beautiful neighborhood (tangle wood) where I can also jog, ride my bike and see the Christmas lights.

I don't have an everyday work commute but some work projects I get involved in is usually from galleria into downtown because that's where most events and things happen.

My priority is commute and being central and close to many things. Even If I lived in a larger and newer place 15+ miles from everything, I wouldn't wanna deal w the drive and being on the freeway so much. I find some outer suburbs (not all) bland and even those that offer your main restaurants and shopping , many sporting events, and larger scale activities happen in inner Houston. It's cool if you don't do many of these but to me it's hard to deny that the "core" doesn't offer anything.

You "couldn't imagine"? that other people got it good too?
I cant imagine you identify yourself with jogging/biking/shopping - thats what bored people do whichever side of town theyre from. christmas lights? other people's neighborhoods? you like that that much?

I dont think the Galleria is seen as the 'city core' of Houston (its downtown) but I think it is. So the center of houston is way towards the westside. The Galleria area is 11mi highway from my house.

My priority is getting to work easily enough and make good money, have a good sized garage/driveway so I can work on my cars and no-nosey neighbors, and easy access to chinatown. Imagine that.

[eastontracks]

Originally Posted by GTRdad

You "couldn't imagine"? that other people got it good too?
I cant imagine you identify yourself with jogging/biking/shopping - thats what bored people do whichever side of town theyre from. christmas lights? other people's neighborhoods? you like that that much?

I dont think the Galleria is seen as the 'city core' of Houston (its downtown) but I think it is. So the center of houston is way towards the westside. The Galleria area is 11mi highway from my house.

My priority is getting to work easily enough and make good money, have a good sized garage/driveway so I can work on my cars and no-nosey neighbors, and easy access to chinatown. Imagine that.

yeah making money is a good thing too, a priority for everyone i think
having a garage and driveway doesnt really matter since i dont have too many vehicles/bikes or collectibles... yet. chinatown is cool too, not far from me either. i mean, i think everyone can make money and have a driveway no? my point is the location and amenities close by to me and what the core of houston means to me.

in regards to Christmas lights, well... the lights on those houses are stunning. of course every house in every neighborhood has lights but these are professionally set up and displayed so yeah it does look nice. especially when im outside riding a bike or jogging, or just cruisin the area. its appealing to the eyes because certain neighborhoods like these are unique.

i do identify myself with the outdoor stuff i can take advantage of here, and id rather have it in a setting of the places mentioned instead instead of somewhere else less appealing. regardless of those things, i like being closer to pro sporting events and other events that go on. normally its this area and downtown.

[nilkn]

Originally Posted by Mr. Don Draper

Yes...Houston is cheap.

Median sales price:

New York, NY: $1,425,000
San Francisco, CA: $850,000
Brooklyn, NY: $583,000
Queens, NY: $519,000
Los Angeles, CA: $490,000
Honolulu, HI: $477,952
Washington, DC: $453,000
Boston, MA $430,000
Stamford, CT:$430,000
San Diego, CA: $428,000
Seattle, WA: $414,000
Bronx, NY: $333,900
Portland, OR: $299,000
Denver, CO: $256,300



Houston: $184,400

Did you really just compare the entire metropolitan area of Houston, including very far-out suburbs, to the ultra-urban Manhattan and San Francisco? You'd have to restrict yourself to the more exclusive areas of the inner loop for this comparison to make sense, and I think you'll find the numbers aren't so convincing in that case.

[sksainath]

Originally Posted by nilkn

Did you really just compare the entire metropolitan area of Houston, including very far-out suburbs, to the ultra-urban Manhattan and San Francisco? You'd have to restrict yourself to the more exclusive areas of the inner loop for this comparison to make sense, and I think you'll find the numbers aren't so convincing in that case.

While I agree that the far-out suburbs needs to be excluded, why should only the more exclusive areas of the inner loop be used for the comparison. The LA area most likely includes the home sales of some run-down areas. SF has bad areas but its to the east of the Bay Bridge (hello Oakland ). For Houston, I would include the urban areas including the inner loop, uptown, memorial city, bellaire,sharpstown, Alief and even the energy corridor. That is not a complete list but generally speaking I believe thats where most of the Houston residents live.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by sksainath

While I agree that the far-out suburbs needs to be excluded, why should only the more exclusive areas of the inner loop be used for the comparison. The LA area most likely includes the home sales of some run-down areas. SF has bad areas but its to the east of the Bay Bridge (hello Oakland ). For Houston, I would include the urban areas including the inner loop, uptown, memorial city, bellaire,sharpstown, Alief and even the energy corridor. That is not a complete list but generally speaking I believe thats where most of the Houston residents live.

Hey I lived in Oakland for a couple years, there's actually some pretty nice (and expensive) parts to that city too. Even SF has some crappy parts, or it did during the time I was out there.

I think Nilkn is wrong - with our level of economic prominence, cultural amenities, and international flavor (not mention metro area population) we should at least compare ourselves to places like Chicago and SF, even Los Angeles. We just don't have the cultural zeitgeist factor of those other places, but big deal. NYC is a stretch for comparison to any other U.S. city - it and London pretty much exist in a separate orbit.

[sksainath]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

Hey I lived in Oakland for a couple years, there's actually some pretty nice (and expensive) parts to that city too. Even SF has some crappy parts, or it did during the time I was out there.

I think Nilkn is wrong - with our level of economic prominence, cultural amenities, and international flavor (not mention metro area population) we should at least compare ourselves to places like Chicago and SF, even Los Angeles. We just don't have the cultural zeitgeist factor of those other places, but big deal. NYC is a stretch for comparison to any other U.S. city - it and London pretty much exist in a separate orbit.

hahaha yeah dear old Oakland...Worked in Oakland and lived in Fremont (went to high school) for a long time. Yeah the Oakland hills and some parts are nice but most of downtown is scary. Even Vallejo is very very bad. I am no expert on SF but it seemed to me that even the crappy parts were not that bad. Subjective? yes ofcourse. SF has an advantage of being small and expensive thus steering the majority of the middle class to the east and south bay. LA can be compared to Houston and we can certainly become a powerhouse with some small but often painfully long changes.
(1) Light rail (everyone here is on board with this)
(2) Improve roads (especially important ones like Westheimer, Richmond, San Felipe, Buffalo Speedway and FANIN)
(3) Continue to encourage people to move to downtown

Unfortunately, this all means that Houston will become more and more expensive over time.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by sksainath

hahaha yeah dear old Oakland...Worked in Oakland and lived in Fremont (went to high school) for a long time. Yeah the Oakland hills and some parts are nice but most of downtown is scary. Even Vallejo is very very bad. I am no expert on SF but it seemed to me that even the crappy parts were not that bad. Subjective? yes ofcourse. SF has an advantage of being small and expensive thus steering the majority of the middle class to the east and south bay. LA can be compared to Houston and we can certainly become a powerhouse with some small but often painfully long changes.
(1) Light rail (everyone here is on board with this)
(2) Improve roads (especially important ones like Westheimer, Richmond, San Felipe, Buffalo Speedway and FANIN)
(3) Continue to encourage people to move to downtown

Unfortunately, this all means that Houston will become more and more expensive over time.

It was 20 years ago that I was living out there. SF had some real no-go parts (Mission District, Sunnydale, Bayview) but maybe they're less scary now. Oakland had scary parts (West and East Oakland), downtown wasn't scary but it was kind of dead except for Chinatown. Vallejo and Hayward had the feel of places that were on the way down. Daly City was kind of rough too - my first apartment was there, I moved after there was a gang shooting

For Houston, it's not just getting people to move downtown (the CBD itself) but to neighborhoods all around downtown, like EaDo, 3rd Ward and Near Northside.

[sksainath]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

It was 20 years ago that I was living out there. SF had some real no-go parts (Mission District, Sunnydale, Bayview) but maybe they're less scary now. Oakland had scary parts (West and East Oakland), downtown wasn't scary but it was kind of dead except for Chinatown. Vallejo and Hayward had the feel of places that were on the way down. Daly City was kind of rough too - my first apartment was there, I moved after there was a gang shooting

For Houston, it's not just getting people to move downtown (the CBD itself) but to neighborhoods all around downtown, like EaDo, 3rd Ward and Near Northside.

Yeah those areas of SF arent the best but atleast from my experience (2002-2011) it is not very scary. I used to go to Mission to eat most of the times. They got some nice restaurants in the area. Downtown Oakland is very bad now. I worked on Broadway and 12th street. I would not dare venture along Broadway even in daylight. The whole BART cop shooting protests and later on the Occupy movements **** on that area near city center. They had to let us go early some days so we dont get stuck in the area with the BART closing their stations. Hayward has come around a lot but Vallejo remains dangerous.
And regarding downtown, yes I should include Eado, 3rd Ward and Near Northside. Am I the only one who gets scared driving around some parts just east of downtown. I am seeing a lot of new construction but some areas soo close to downtown are empty and give me the creeps.